mirror of
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/gnulib.git
synced 2025-08-17 12:41:05 +03:00
162 lines
7.4 KiB
Plaintext
162 lines
7.4 KiB
Plaintext
Legal Issues about Contributing Code to GNU last updated 3 Mar 98
|
|
|
|
Project GNU has to be careful to obey intellectual property laws, even
|
|
though these laws are wrong and people generally should share useful
|
|
information without hesitation, because we are in the public eye.
|
|
|
|
This means that if you want to contribute software, you have to do
|
|
something to give us legal permission to use it. There are four ways
|
|
this can be done:
|
|
|
|
* Assign the copyright to the Free Software Foundation.
|
|
This is what we prefer because it allows us to use the copyright law
|
|
to prevent others from hoarding modified versions of the program.
|
|
|
|
* Keep the copyright yourself and give us a suitable nonexclusive
|
|
license. It will then be up to you to prevent any unauthorized
|
|
hoarding of modified versions; we will be unable to act. (This
|
|
alternative is impractical for us if the use for your work is to be
|
|
merged into a preexisting GNU program.)
|
|
|
|
* Keep the copyright and release the program yourself under the GNU
|
|
GPL. (This alternative too is impractical for contributions to a
|
|
preexisting GNU program.)
|
|
|
|
* Put the code in the public domain. Then there is nothing to stop hoarding
|
|
of modified versions, but we can still use the program in GNU.
|
|
|
|
Most of these alternatives require a signed piece of paper to make it
|
|
happen.
|
|
|
|
* Assigning copyright.
|
|
|
|
Assigning the copyright means signing a contract that makes the Free
|
|
Software Foundation the "owner" of the program according to the law.
|
|
As the copyright holder, the Foundation can sue anyone who tries to
|
|
distribute the program as a proprietary product. We are willing to
|
|
keep your name on the program as the author for as long as the program
|
|
remains recognizably distinct. ("Owner" is in quotes to show that we
|
|
don't really believe in this kind of ownership. We are against the
|
|
copyright law, because it is intended to assist information hoarding,
|
|
but since we cannot get it repealed just yet, we use it to stop
|
|
hoarding when we can.)
|
|
|
|
The assignment contract commits the foundation to setting distribution
|
|
terms that permit free redistribution.
|
|
|
|
Often we don't want to do the work of starting to distribute a program
|
|
right away. There are many things which we will need in order to have
|
|
a complete system but which aren't really useful until the rest of the
|
|
system is done. But signing the assignment does not stop you from
|
|
distributing the program yourself--as long as you do so under the GNU
|
|
terms. You don't have to wait for us to start distributing. You can
|
|
start distributing as soon as you attach our standard copyleft to the
|
|
files. (Ask for our advice on how to do this.)
|
|
|
|
The assignment contract we normally use has a clause that permits you
|
|
to use your code in proprietary programs, on 30 days' notice. (The 30
|
|
days' notice is there because, through a legal technicality, it would
|
|
improve our position in a suit against a hoarder.) Although we
|
|
believe that proprietary software is wrong, we include this clause
|
|
because it would serve no purpose to ask you to promise not to do it.
|
|
You're giving us a gift in the first place.
|
|
|
|
You don't need to invoke this clause in order to distribute copies as
|
|
free software under the GNU GPL, since everyone is allowed to do that.
|
|
|
|
* Keeping the copyright.
|
|
|
|
Keeping the copyright and giving the Free Software Foundation a
|
|
nonexclusive license also requires signing a contract. The license we
|
|
need permits us to add our usual distribution terms; it recognizes
|
|
possession of a copy with our distribution terms accurately stated as
|
|
licensing anyone to redistribute on those terms. However, if someone
|
|
violates these terms--for example, if he gets a copy from us, and uses
|
|
it as a basis for a proprietary product in violation of our terms--we
|
|
cannot sue him. You have to sue, or he gets away with it.
|
|
|
|
The law doesn't recognize the idea that he, by doing this, is stealing
|
|
rights from the public; it thinks that information exists to be
|
|
hoarded and is concerned only with how the spoils are to be divided.
|
|
|
|
* Releasing it yourself.
|
|
|
|
You can release a program yourself under copyleft distribution terms
|
|
such as the GNU GPL. (In order to accept the program as GNU software,
|
|
we would have to be happy with your choice of terms.) This does not
|
|
require a contract between you and the FSF, but we would appreciate
|
|
having a signed piece of paper to confirm your decision.
|
|
|
|
If someone violates your terms--for example, if someone gets a copy
|
|
from us, and uses it as a basis for a proprietary product in violation
|
|
of the terms--we cannot sue him. You would have to sue, or he gets
|
|
away with it.
|
|
|
|
* Public domain.
|
|
|
|
If you put the program in the public domain, we prefer to have a signed
|
|
piece of paper--a disclaimer of rights--from you confirming this. If the
|
|
program is not very important, we can do without one; the worst that could
|
|
happen is that we might some day be forced to stop using it.
|
|
|
|
The law says that anyone can copyright a modified version of the public
|
|
domain work. (This doesn't restrict the original, which remains in the
|
|
public domain; only the changes are copyrighted.) If we make extensive
|
|
changes, we will probably do this and add our usual copyleft. If we make
|
|
small changes, we will leave the version we distribute in the public
|
|
domain.
|
|
|
|
* What about your employer?
|
|
|
|
If you are employed to do programming, or have made an agreement with your
|
|
employer that says it owns programs you write, we need a signed piece of
|
|
paper from your employer disclaiming rights to the program. It should be
|
|
signed by a vice president or general manager of the company. If you
|
|
can't get at them, it is almost as good to find someone who signs licenses
|
|
for software that is purchased. Here is a sample wording:
|
|
|
|
Digital Stimulation Corporation hereby disclaims all copyright interest
|
|
in the program "seduce.el" (a program to direct assemblers to make passes
|
|
at compilers under GNU Emacs) written by Hugh Heffner.
|
|
|
|
<signature of Ty Coon>, 1 April 1987
|
|
Ty Coon, President of Vice, Digital Stimulation Corp.
|
|
|
|
The description of what the program does is just to make it clearer
|
|
what the disclaimer covers.
|
|
|
|
If what you did was change an existing program, it should say this:
|
|
|
|
...in the changes and enhancements made by Hugh Heffner to the
|
|
program "seduce.el".
|
|
|
|
* Did anyone else contribute?
|
|
|
|
If someone else contributed more than a few lines here or there to the
|
|
program, then that person too is an author, and that person too needs to
|
|
sign papers just as you do. So may that person's employer. However, if
|
|
his contribution is just a fraction of the whole work, it is satisfactory
|
|
if he disclaims his own rights, even if you are assigning yours. (If just
|
|
the minor contributors' work goes in the public domain, that doesn't leave
|
|
much of a loophole for hoarders.)
|
|
|
|
If you incorporated packages which you found floating around as "public
|
|
domain", we might still want to track down their authors, to get
|
|
disclaimers to reassure us that they really are in the public domain. So
|
|
keep track of what these packages are and who wrote them.
|
|
|
|
* A reminder:
|
|
|
|
In working on a project for GNU, DO NOT study and follow any Unix
|
|
sources or other non-free software that might have any bearing on the
|
|
project. Don't refer to them at all, unless you are forced to for
|
|
non-GNU reasons.
|
|
|
|
Especially, if you are working on an imitation of a Unix utility, DO
|
|
NOT refer to the source for that utility.
|
|
|
|
It is not considered a serious problem if you have read Unix sources
|
|
in the past for other purposes, provided you don't copy anything in
|
|
particular from them. But referring to them while you do the work
|
|
could cause us legal problems later.
|